Friday, August 30, 2013

What Does the Bible Say About Education? Creation Today Season 3 Episode 7

Filmed in the week that public schools returned, Paul and Eric discuss the biblical foundation for education, have a look at practical ways that science is taught and analyze how public education has changed over the decades.

Shared mutations in the human and chimpanzee β-globin pseudogenes is not evidence for a common ancestor

by Bryan Anderson

Evolutionists have often postulated that there are ‘shared mutations’
in pseudogenes (supposedly defective genes) from different baramins
(biblical kinds) and that this is
conclusive evidence that the different baramins share a common ancestor.
Consequently, this postulation appears to falsify biblical creation in
favor of evolution. This argument is so
convincing because a similar argument is used in other non-biological
fields to prove a common source for two pieces of information. For
example, two similar written articles can be compared
to identify plagiarism, by searching for unusual spelling errors that
appear in both articles. If unusual spelling errors are identified, this
is compelling evidence that one of the authors
has copied the other’s article, or that both of the authors have copied
another author’s article.

Evolutionists have suggested that the β-globin pseudogenes in humans
and chimpanzees contain shared mutations and they have used this idea to
conclude humans and chimpanzees share a
common ancestor.1 Despite the recent discoveries that some pseudogenes actually have a
function,2 the apparent β-globin pseudogenes and their so-called shared mutations are still being used as evidence for a common
ancestor for humans and chimpanzees in the current literature.3 This conclusion is incompatible with biblical creation since the Bible
says that humans and the ancestors of chimpanzees were created separately.

Human and chimpanzee β-globin gene clusters

Globin genes code for the predominate proteins in red blood
cells—hemoglobin. It binds and transports oxygen from the lungs to cells
throughout the body. Hemoglobin is needed because
oxygen dissolves poorly in the blood plasma. Humans carry nine globin
genes, which are all slightly different to each other. Five of these
genes are clustered together in a region of DNA called
the ‘β-globin gene cluster’, which is located on chromosome 11 in humans
(figure 1). These genes are not all switched on at the same time but in
stages, corresponding to their
position on the chromosome and the different stages of human
development.

The β-globin pseudogene in humans is located in the β-globin gene
cluster, between the γ-A and the δ-globin genes (figure 1). There are
two copies of the γ-globin
genes, called γ-A and -G. The β-globin pseudogene shows higher
similarity to the γ-globin gene, but is called the β-globin pseudogene
because it was originally identified
by comparing it to the β-globin gene of rabbits.4 Chimpanzees have the same globin genes in the same order, including the
β-globin pseudogene.

Apparent genetic defects in the β-globin pseudogenes

Evolutionists hypothesized several point mutations and deletions in
the β-globin pseudogenes of humans and chimpanzees and these differences
render these regions incapable of being
translated (figure 1). The start codon (a codon is a sequence of three
adjacent nucleotides constituting the genetic code) of the human
β-globin pseudogene has two apparent point
mutations which prevents the protein-synthesizing machinery (ribosome)
identifying it as a gene. A point mutation has been suggested in humans
at codon 15 that signals the ribosome to
prematurely terminate synthesis of the protein (premature stop codon).
At codons 20 and 145 in humans it has been suggested that there are
deletions of 1 bp. The first deletion messes up the
code of the gene, resulting in six stop codons in the exons downstream,
and the second scrambles a correct stop codon at the end of the
pseudogene. These same hypothesized defects are found
at the same position on the chimpanzee chromosome. In addition to the
theoretical predictions, scientists have not detected any evidence using
wet laboratory techniques that these pseudogenes
in humans or chimpanzees are translated.4

Figure 1. The organization of the
β-globin gene cluster in humans and an expanded view of the β-globin
pseudogene, showing the ‘defects’.
The first (horizontal) track displays the position on the chromosome (in
bp). The second track is a diagrammatic illustration of the
organization of β-globin gene cluster. Arrows indicate
the direction of the genes. The bottom bar is an expanded view of the
β-globin pseudogene. The white boxes are introns.

Interesting findings about the β-globin pseudogenes

There are three interesting findings about the β-globin pseudogenes
from humans and chimpanzees. Firstly, when the pseudogenes from human
and chimpanzee are aligned and analyzed for
differences they are almost identical.1 The high level of
similarity is not only seen in the exons of these pseudogenes, but also
in the regions immediately upstream of the first
exons (promoters and 5’ untranslated regions), between (introns), and
immediately downstream of third exons (3’ untranslated regions). These
regions have only 31 bp that are
different. Secondly, there are putative promoters located upstream of
these pseudogenes that are almost identical, with only 1 bp of the 15 bp
TATA- and CAAT-like boxes that is different in
humans and chimpanzees.1 The TATA- and CAAT-like boxes of the
human β-globin pseudogene are located at nucleotides -25 and -81,
respectively. The transcription initiation site
is numbered as the +1 position and nucleotides upstream are numbered
with negative integers. The human β-globin pseudogene TATA-like box has
the sequence of TAAAAA and the CAAT-like box
has the sequence GGTCAATAG. Normally, TATA and CAAT boxes are centered
at nucleotides -25 and -80, respectively, with the consensus TATAAA and
GGCCAATCT. Therefore, the TATA- and CAAT-like boxes
of the human β-globin pseudogene are located at the correct positions
and are only 1 and 3 bp, respectively, from the consensus sequence.
Finally, the predicted intron junctions of the
pseudogenes obey the ‘GU/AG RNA splicing rule’1 (‘RNA splicing’ is the modification of an RNA transcript, in which the transcript is cut at the intron
junctions; the introns are then removed and the exons are spliced together).

Evolutionists have shown little interest in these findings about the
β-globin pseudogenes. This is because they have assumed that these
pseudogenes are just more nonfunctional junk
DNA. Evolutionists believe the DNA of more complex organisms, such as
primates, must consist of mainly junk,5
so finding pseudogenes
within the β-globin gene clusters is unsurprising to them. In addition
to this, scientists may have detected that two exons of the β-globin
pseudogene in humans are transcribed into
non-coding RNA (ncRNA).6-8
However, this possible finding has been largely ignored by the
scientific community, again because of the assumption that this region
is a pseudogene. Some evolutionists prematurely dismiss this finding as
merely noise in their wet laboratory results. They
assume that many of the RNA transcripts detected in humans, primates and
the other more complex organisms are because of the limitations of the
current techniques and equipment used. Therefore,
they have concluded these regions are not transcribed to RNA.9

Discussion

The fact that these β-globin pseudogenes in humans and chimpanzees
are almost identical suggests that they either (1) have not been copied
in each organism from generation to generation
for the past five million years, (2) the entire regions, including the
promoters, 5’ untranslated regions, introns and 3’ untranslated regions
are functionally constrained and must
remain almost identical, or (3) they have been transferred from
chimpanzees to humans or vice versa, recently. The first suggestion is
consistent with the Creation hypothesis. The second is
unlikely, because Sanford has shown that natural selection cannot
maintain the integrity of human DNA for so long.10
The third
suggestion is also unlikely because there is no evidence in nature that
large amounts of genetic material can be transferred between humans and
chimpanzees. Consequently, the fact that high
rates of mutations are not seen and that these regions are almost
identical suggests they are young. Hence, this reduction in time for the
existence of human and chimpanzee organisms makes it
highly improbable they evolved from a common ancestor.

Based on the above evidence and our present understanding of
genetics, the best hypothesis for these regions is that they function to
remove the γ-globin RNA transcripts. As stated
earlier in this article, subsets of globin genes are switched on and off
according to the order on the chromosome, and their order correlates to
the different stages of development. At the
birth of a human infant, the γ-globin genes are significantly
down-regulated and the β-globin gene is significantly up-regulated, with
normal adult levels reached for each gene by
the end of the first year of the infant’s life. The ncRNA transcripts
from these pseudogenes may bind with ncRNA transcripts partners that are
mirror images to the pseudogene transcripts,
these transcripts are known as ‘antisense transcripts’. The pair of
transcripts is then cut up, a process known as ‘dicing’, and the RNA
fragments are used to direct
degradation machinery to the γ-RNA transcripts. This process is known as
‘RNA induced RNA silencing’. Thus cellular levels of the γ-RNA
transcripts are decreased.
Although, the γ-globin genes may have their own antisense transcripts, a
third antisense transcript would amplify the process of γ-globin RNA
transcript removal.

This hypothesis is supported by the following facts. That in humans and chimpanzees;

Since TATA- and CAAT-like boxes have been identified upstream of these regions, these regions may be transcriptionally active;

the predicted intron junctions obey the
GU/AG rule, therefore, suggesting that splicing would occur if these
regions were transcribed;

all three exons have at least one stop codon;

these regions are similar to the γ-globin genes; and

these regions are located between the γ-A and the β-globin genes.

In addition to this, transcripts may have been detected for the
second and third exons, in humans. Finally, scientists have identified a
pseudogene in mice that codes for an antisense
transcript. Once this antisense transcript is bound to its cognate
transcript, it is diced and then used to induce silencing.11 Although
this phenomenon in mice is somewhat different, it does add support for the above hypothesis.

Thus, evolutionists have somewhat prematurely concluded that these
regions in humans and chimpanzees are genuine pseudogenes (i.e. former
genes deactivated by mutations) and that there are
shared mutations in these regions. Whatever the reason for these
pseudogenes, there is a lack of evidence in these regions to suggest
that humans and chimpanzees have a common ancestor.

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

The Eye Designed or Evolved?

Dr. George Marshall
Did the eye evolve from a simple layer of photo-sensitive cells into the eyes that we have today? Darwin remarked that ... "several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light" ... but how do photo-sensitive cells work? Is the invertebrate eye really wired the wrong way round? Dr George Marshall an expert in anatomy, who specialised in the human eye for several years answers these questions and many more.

Downloads

An Eye for Creation

An Interview with Eye-Disease Researcher Dr George Marshall, University of Glasgow, Scotland

September 1, 1996

Featured In

Dr George Marshall obtained his B.Sc. (Hons.) in Biology at the University of Strathclyde in 1984. He conducted research into bone marrow cancer at the University of Sheffield for three years until invalided out with a serious, normally incurable illness. He was dramatically healed of this in November 1987 and soon obtained an M.Med.Sci. from Sheffield. He then worked at the University of Manchester before taking up a post at the University of Glasgow in 1988. He obtained his Ph.D. in Ophthalmic Science at Glasgow in 1991 and was elected to chartered biologist (C.Biol.) status and to membership of the Institute of Biology (M.I.Biol.) in 1993. He is now Sir Jules Thorn Lecturer in Ophthalmic Science.

Creation magazine [CM]: Dr Marshall, you wrote to us to comment on the article “Seeing back to front” which appeared in the March–May 1996 issue of Creation magazine. What was your comment?

Dr George Marshall [GM]: I pointed out that the principal reason as to why the eye cannot be regarded as being wired backward (as some evolutionists claim) was hidden in a footnote in your article.

CM: Would you care to elaborate?

Dr George Marshall,
an eye-disease researcher from
the University of Glasgow,
Scotland

GM: The light-detecting structures within photoreceptor cells are located in the stack of discs. These discs are being continually replaced by the formation of new ones at the cell body end of the stack, thereby pushing older discs down the stack. Those discs at the other end of the stack are ‘swallowed’ by a single layer of retinal pigment epithelial (RPE) cells. RPE cells are highly active, and for this they need a very large blood supply—the choroid. Unlike the retina, which is virtually transparent, the choroid is virtually opaque, because of the vast numbers of red blood cells within it. For the retina to be wired the way that Professor Richard Dawkins suggested, would require the choroid to come between the photoreceptor cells and the light, for RPE cells must be kept in intimate contact with both the choroid and photoreceptor to perform their job. Anybody who has had the misfortune of a hemorrhage in front of the retina will testify as to how well red blood cells block out the light.

Then what do you think of the idea that the eye is wired backward?

The notion that the eye was wired backward occurred to me as a 13-year-old when studying eye anatomy in a school science class. It took me two years of lecturing on human eye anatomy to realize why the eye is wired the way it is. The idea that the eye is wired backward comes from a lack of knowledge of eye function and anatomy.

How do you react to the notion that the human eye is the product of evolution?

The more I study the human eye, the harder it is to believe that it evolved. Most people see the miracle of sight. I see a miracle of complexity on viewing things at 100,000 times magnification. It is the perfection of this complexity that causes me to baulk at evolutionary theory.

Can you give our readers some idea of just how complex the eye is?

The retina is probably the most complicated tissue in the whole body. Millions of nerve cells interconnect in a fantastic number of ways to form a miniature ‘brain’. Much of what the photoreceptors ‘see’ is interpreted and processed by the retina long before it enters the brain.

A computer program has allegedly ‘imitated’ the evolution of an eye. Do you accept this?

Those who produced this model would acknowledge that the model is such a gross oversimplification that it cannot be cited as a proof. May I quote a colleague’s reaction [Dr John Hay, B.Sc.(Hons), Ph.D., M.Sc., C.Biol., F.I.Biol.]:
‘Computer simulation of evolutionary processes such as that described have three important flaws. First, the findings imply that the development which is being measured over so many generations is independent of development of other structures which are necessary for function. Second, the changes observed from the simulation are dependent on the original data input which clearly is consequent to human design of the sequences/regions to be worked on and also the program(s) which are used for the simulation. These are not, therefore, random. The third aspect of all this is that there is translation error in such simulations involving computer hardware/software. This can take the form of electronic error in single bits which are coding for a particular digit. Over many loops in this performance, intrinsic error can be magnified considerably. Was the simulation repeated using different PCs etc.? One feels that these three arguments are essential to any computer simulation package of evolutionary processes.
‘My first point indicated that even if there is an eye, it will be useless unless the organism has the neural and/or the mental processes to utilize information perceived by the eye. How can a chance mutation provide this complexity in several different structures? The argument has usually been that there is a plausible intermediate series of eye-designs in living animals, e.g. Euglena has an eyespot; other organisms have a “cup” which acts as a direction finder.
‘However, the organism which defies this evolution is Nautilus. It has a primitive eye with no lens, which is somewhat surprising considering that its close relative, the squid, has one. This organism has (apparently!) been around for millions of years but has never “evolved” a lens despite the fact that it has a retina which would benefit from this simple change.’

What exactly does your work involve?

Lecturing to doctors in medicine who have specialized in ophthalmology and are attempting to gain fellowship with the Royal College of Ophthalmology (FRCOphth). However, my main remit is research into eye diseases using a combination of transmission electron microscopy and immunocytochemistry—a technique that uses antibodies to locate specific proteins such as enzymes.

Do you believe that accepting creation as portrayed in Genesis is essential to your Christian faith?

Yes! On not literally accepting the Genesis account of creation one is left with a major problem—what Scriptures do you accept as true and what Scriptures do you reject as false? Only by accepting the whole of Scripture as the inspired Word of God does one avoid this dilemma. There are Scriptures that are a source of stumbling to the intellect. My practice is to ‘pigeon-hole’ them temporarily and never allow them to be a stumbling block to my faith. It’s amazing how many of these knotty problems have subsequently resolved themselves. Thus Genesis creation may initially appear to be hard to accept, but it strikes me that evolution is equally if not more problematic to believe.

How useful do you find Creation magazine?

Its principal value is that it challenges what is uncritically accepted. Watch any TV program involving nature and you would think that evolution is an established fact. People get bombarded with this so often that they accept it without thinking. Creation magazine makes people realize that it is only a proposal and not fact. There are numerous places in my hospital where I can leave copies on coffee tables to get people to think for themselves.

What advice would you have for Christian students, or for Christians in a science course or teaching situation?

First, recognize that science can become a ‘religion’ in its own right. Scientists say something, so the general public (the ‘worshippers’) accept it without question. Scientists are much more cautious about one another’s findings. Second, science is not static. The science of today is quite different in many ways from the science of yesterday, and will probably bear little resemblance to the science of tomorrow. People once believed in ‘spontaneous generation’ which could be ‘proved’ by putting an old sack and a few bits of cheese in a dark corner. Mice spontaneously generated out of the sack. We laugh at such notions, but I suspect that in a hundred years’ time people will laugh at some of our scientific notions. Third, one can still become an eminent scientist without accepting evolutionary dogma; the ability to produce sound science in the laboratory is not diminished by one’s stance on creation.

Description:
Secular geologists have rejected Biblical history and assert that there has been no global flood as described in Genesis. But vast quantities of fossils and sedimentary rock provide a monumental testimony to this historical event and God's recent judgment. Is the worldview of these geologists causing them to "deliberately ignore that the world was deluged with water and perished" (2 Peter 3:3-6)?

This presentation provides the Biblical answer to the fossil record and an encouragement for Christians to trust in the Bible as authoritative on early Earth history. Numerous examples of fossils are provided that defy conventional explanation and interpretation in support of the theory of evolution. When examined, we can easily see that the fossils have been misinterpreted by naturalistic scientists and are much more consistent with catastrophic activity and a young Earth.

About the Speaker:
Chris Ashcraft is a Christian educator, creation scientist, and speaker employed as high school science teacher at Cedar Park Christian Schools where he provides instruction in Biology, Chemistry, Human Anatomy and Physiology, and Life Science.

Formerly, Chris was a research technician, specialized in plant tissue culture, and genetic transformation technology. He served as a research technician at the Cotton Fiber Production Laboratory at Texas Tech University, he then provided technical support at the Plant Transformation Facility at Oklahoma State University, and lastly was employed as the Plant Transformation Specialist for EDEN Bioscience in Bothell Washington .

He obtained a Bachelor of Science in biology from Wayland Baptist University in 1989, a Master of Science in biology from Texas Tech University in 1996, a Master of Education from the University of Washington in 2008, and a Master is Teaching Math and Science from Seattle Pacific University in 2012.

Chris moved from research science into the teaching profession to serve God in Christian education. His decision was motivated by the impact that secular science is having on people of faith. Today, close to 50% of Christian students lose their belief in God while attending secular schools. This tendency could be lessened if the Church was better equipped to defend the authority of Biblical teachings (1 Peter 3:15). To be prepared for these challenges, it is important that Churches provide regular educational programs on creation and other Bible apologetics.

Monday, August 26, 2013

Description:

The first few books of Genesis are indispensable to the Christian
Worldview in setting forth important doctrinal definitions and
providing critical details on the history of the early Earth. However,
due largely to the conflicting teachings naturalistic science many in
the Church question this important historical record. Does the bible
support billions of years? Was the flood of Noah a global event? This
talk is a defense of the literal Biblical worldview, and offers
encouragement for Christians to trust in the Bible as authoritative.

About the Speaker:

Chris Ashcraft is a Christian educator, creation scientist, and
speaker employed as high school science teacher at Cedar Park
Christian Schools where he provides instruction in Biology, Chemistry,
Human Anatomy and Physiology, and Life Science.

Formerly, Chris was a research technician, specialized in plant tissue
culture, and genetic transformation technology. He served as a
research technician at the Cotton Fiber Production Laboratory at Texas
Tech University, he then provided technical support at the Plant
Transformation Facility at Oklahoma State University, and lastly was
employed as the Plant Transformation Specialist for EDEN Bioscience in
Bothell Washington .

He obtained a Bachelor of Science in biology from Wayland Baptist
University in 1989, a Master of Science in biology from Texas Tech
University in 1996, a Master of Education from the University of
Washington in 2008, and a Master is Teaching Math and Science from
Seattle Pacific University in 2012.

Chris moved from research science into the teaching profession to
serve God in Christian education. His decision was motivated by the
impact that secular science is having on people of faith. Today, close
to 50% of Christian students lose their belief in God while attending
secular schools. This tendency could be lessened if the Church was
better equipped to defend the authority of Biblical teachings (1 Peter
3:15). To be prepared for these challenges, it is important that
Churches provide regular educational programs on creation and other
Bible apologetics.

Monday, August 19, 2013

Description:

You probably know that the Bible describes a young Earth -- thousands of years old, not billions. You might even know some of the evidence for this. But what about the rest of the Universe? In this presentation, we'll briefly review some evidence for the Earth being young, not old. Then we'll continue out into our Solar System, and then out into the broader Universe, to see that it too has much evidence for youth -- in accordance with the Biblical account of Creation.

About the Speaker:

Spike Psarris has a Bachelor's of Science in Electrical Engineering from the University of Massachusetts, and has done graduate work in Physics. For a number of years, he was an engineer in the U.S. military space program. He went into the U.S. military space program as an atheist and committed evolutionist, and came out of it as a young-earth creationist and Christian.(CreationAstronomy.com)

Friday, August 16, 2013

Description:

In this lecture Dr. Bergman talks about his latest book that surpasses attempts by others to expose the evils of Darwinism, Nazism, and racism. Dr. Bergman takes a look at the role that Darwinian evolution played in Hitler's Nazi campaign of genocide. Throughout the highly documented book there is an obvious thread of Darwinian dogma intertwined in the hearts, minds, and practices of the Nazis. Creationists and conservatives often point out the connection of Darwinism to Hitler and his henchmen. Too many times, that logical point is silenced by statements that claim that Hitler was a Christian. Dr. Bergman pounds the final nail into the coffin of any claim of connections between Hitler's ventures and Biblical values.

This fascinating program delves into Hitler's eugenics goals; what triggered his anti-Semitic attitudes; his leading scientists; the connection between social Darwinism and government sponsored mass murder; Nazism as applied evolution; the content of Germany's biology textbooks and more.

About the Speaker:

Dr. Gerald R. "Jerry" Bergman is an adjunct associate professor at Medical University of Ohio and an instructor in the Division of Arts & Sciences at Northwest State Community College in Archbold, Ohio. He teaches biochemistry, biology, chemistry and physics. He has taught at the college level for 35 years including 7 years at Bowling Green State University, 6 years at the University of Toledo, and 20 years at Northwest State. He started as a graduate student in biochemistry at Medical College of Ohio in 1985, and was later hired as an adjunct instructor and research associate in the experimental pathology department and he still is still on the faculty at MCO (now named Medical University of Ohio). He has also worked for several years as a therapist at various psychological clinics including Arlington Psychological Associates in Toledo, Ohio.

Thursday, August 15, 2013

Description:

We're told that our Universe formed in a Big Bang event, about 14 billion years ago. Science programs, textbooks, and other media claim that there's lots of evidence for this. But is this true? In this presentation, we'll examine the Big Bang theory. We'll see that it not only lacks solid evidence, it also contradicts several important laws of science. Overall we'll see that the Big Bang is not a good scientific model. Instead, it has all the characteristics of a religious belief system for atheists -- one that is believed in spite of the evidence, because the alternative (Biblical Creation) implies accountability to a Creator.

About the Speaker:

Spike Psarris has a Bachelor's of Science in Electrical Engineering from the University of Massachusetts, and has done graduate work in Physics. For a number of years, he was an engineer in the U.S. military space program. He went into the U.S. military space program as an atheist and committed evolutionist, and came out of it as a young-earth creationist and Christian. (CreationAstronomy.com)

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Do Creation Scientists Have the Answers? Season 3 Episode 5

This show features interviews with Dr. Georgia Purdom, molecular geneticist from Answer in Genesis, and Dr. Andrew Fabich, microbiologist from Liberty University, both keynote speakers at the recent Answers in Genesis Mega Conference. Each of their scientific fields yields a treasure chest of documentation substantiating that God’s Word is literally true and scientifically accurate. What has been used for many years as evidence for evolution, turns out to be a gold mine of evidence confirming creation.

Friday, August 9, 2013

Giants of Science

David Laurenson
It has been claimed by many that creationists cannot do science and that having a starting assumption that the world is created will lead to bad science. Dr Dave Laurenson answers these critics. Johann Kepler, Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, David Brewster, John Dalton, Michael Faraday, Blaise Pascal, Clerk Maxwell, Louis Pasteur, William Thompson (Lord Kelvin), and a host of others of comparable stature were men who firmly believed in special creation and yet great scientists.

Thursday, August 8, 2013

Description:

Why did science flourish in the West, and only the West? The biblical worldview provided the presuppositions that allowed science to flourish while it was stillborn in other places such as Greece and China. Evolutionists deny this biblical foundation for science by accusing Christianity of superstitions that held science back. Jonathan deftly busts the myth of the 'Dark Ages'—a time
marked by many scientific advances. He also busts the myths of Galileo, belief in a flat earth, and more.

About the Speaker:

Dr. Jonathan Sarfati is a research scientist and speaker with Creation Ministries International (creation.com). He was born in Ararat, Australia in 1964. He moved to New Zealand as a child and later studied science at Victoria University of Wellington. He obtained a B.Sc. (Hons.) in Chemistry with two physics papers substituted (nuclear and condensed matter physics). His Ph.D. in Chemistry was awarded for a thesis entitled 'A Spectroscopic Study of some Chalcogenide Ring and Cage Molecules'. He has co-authored papers in mainstream scientific journals on high temperature superconductors and selenium-containing ring and cage-shaped molecules. He also had a co-authored paper on high-temperature superconductors published in Nature when he was 22.

A
study of the evidence of vestigial organs, natural selection, the fifth
digit, the relevance of the stickleback, Darwin's finches and Lenski's
bacteria—all under the microscope of the Scientific Method--observable
evidence from the minds of experts. Prepare to have your faith shaken.

I
identify a little-noticed issue in the normal formulation of the light
travel time problem. In addition, I lay groundwork for the beginning of a
new solution to the problem. This solution invokes similarity between
creative acts of Day Four and other days of the Creation Week, but
especially Day Three. The Day Three account suggests unusually fast
growth for plants. In similar fashion, this possible new solution
suggests unusually fast propagation of light on Day Four, probably by
rapid expansion of space. This is an appeal to a miraculous event rather
than a physical process to get distant starlight to the earth. It is
not yet clear whether this suggestion could have testable predictions.
If this is the correct way to look at the problem, it may be that we are
seeing much of the universe in something close to real time. I briefly
compare this possible solution to the light travel time to other
previously published proposals.

The Tower of Babel s03e04

Where did all the people groups come from? Today’s show is about “The Tower of Babel” and the effect of that event in history. Eric Hovind and Paul Taylor once again interview Answers in Genesis speaker, writer and researcher Bodie Hodge, who has written a book entitled “The Tower of Babel”

Tower of BabelBuy Individually
Discover the truth of the people groups and the
civilizations that spread across the earth. All trace their roots back
to Babel as well as to the sons and grandsons of Noah.

The Tower of BabelBuy Individually
This exciting new video answers the most important
questions about the Tower of Babel and the intriguing topics related to
it. What happened at Babel is key to understanding evangelism and the
lands and people of the world today!

Monday, August 5, 2013

Description
- Widespread apostasy in young people—not because of lack of evidence, but lack of dissemination of the evidence.

- Jesus as Creator, as well as Kinsman-Redeemer, meaning that He must be our blood relative. This means that all humanity must come from Adam, also the ancestor of Jesus, the Last Adam. Adam's sin brought death, so Jesus brought Resurrection—Rom. 5 and 1 Cor. 15 make an explicit connection.

- Since death came through sin, fossil record must pre-date Adam. Explained by Genesis global Flood, which has other evidences.

About the Speaker:
Dr. Jonathan Sarfati is a research scientist and speaker with Creation Ministries International (http://creation.com). He was born in Ararat, Australia in 1964. He moved to New Zealand as a child and later studied science at Victoria University of Wellington. He obtained a B.Sc. (Hons.) in Chemistry with two physics papers substituted (nuclear and condensed matter physics). His Ph.D. in Chemistry was awarded for a thesis entitled 'A Spectroscopic Study of some Chalcogenide Ring and Cage Molecules'. He has co-authored papers in mainstream scientific journals on high temperature superconductors and selenium-containing ring and cage-shaped molecules. He also had a co-authored paper on high-temperature superconductors published in Nature when he was 22.

This video was recorded during by the Northwest Creation Network while speaking to the junior and senior high students at Cedar Park Christian School - MLT.

Friday, August 2, 2013

The Grand Canyon: Evidence for the Global Flood

Paul Garner
Presented at Edinburgh Creation Group | Paul Garner is a Fellow of the Geological Society, he takes us on an in depth tour of the Grand Canyon. Paul does not think the canyon was formed by gradual erosion from the Colorado River.

Downloads

Paul Garner, B.Sc.(Hons) (geology)

Biography

Paul Garner has a degree in Environmental Sciences, with an emphasis on Geology and Biology. He is a Fellow of the Geological Society of London and a Professional Member of the Geological Society of America. He is part of a team studying the Coconino Sandstone, an extensive rock unit that occurs in Grand Canyon and across central and northern Arizona. After twelve years working as a senior information scientist for a Cambridge-based company, he was employed as a researcher and lecturer with Biblical Creation Ministries in October 2002. He is the author of more than 50 creationist papers and his first book, ‘The New Creationism: Building Scientific Theories on a Biblical Foundation’, was published by Evangelical Press in 2009. He is married with two children and is a member of Cambridge Presbyterian Church.